Is it fair to flag and delete answers taking an extremely conservative position?

Question

While I understand the downvotes this answer to Feminist's claim that the Vedas, Ramayana and Mahabharata were written by male writers has received, I don't understand why the answer has been flagged as offensive and deleted. Personally, I think this is abuse of flagging privileges. Is there a way to undelete this answer?

This is what the answer stated before it was flagged and deleted:

[How do you go about refuting a feminist's (male or female) claim that the Vedas, epics like Ramayana and Mahabharata were authored by male persons?]

You don't. There's no reason to refute them because there's nothing wrong with men writing these scriptures or what is written. Women are called evil and less intelligent in not just Hinduism, but just about every religion on the planet. Women have invented or made almost nothing in the world. They have made almost no great contribution to anything.

The speaker in this YouTube video jokingly points out that Sita could have very well asked Rama to accompany her into the fire to prove together that their sanctity is intact.

He went to rescue her, not the other way around. He risked his life dozens of times and defeated Ravan's army for her, not the other way around. And anyway this is not a game of equality. Women are of lower birth and they must serve their husbands. They have to act as per the wishes of their husband. Even goddesses are serving gods.

See how she's pressing his feet? That's how a woman should be. In fact, Shiv Puraan (Rudra Samhita 54) goes further into this:

• 19. Even when beaten by him she shall remain glad and say "I may even be killed, O lord, Be kind to me."
• 25. If a woman wants holy water she shall drink the same with which her husband's feet have been washed. All holy rivers are present in that water.

Feminists are atheists/liberals and western men are complaining that their rights have been taken away - that they are being discriminated against and abused in society by women who are favored in every situation. Western families are almost dead. Their whole society is full of old people because men are running away from women. Men are even scared to be alone with women in office spaces. Western society is dying because of atheism.

Considering this a Q&A site created for a religion, are users not allowed to take extreme conservative positions like the above and believe in literal interpretation of scriptures? Are other established users on the site going to dictate what positions other users should take on any particular issue?

A moderator left a comment under one of the answers by the same user reminding him of the Code of Conduct but does CoC really apply in this case? Was this comment really necessary? Is the mod suggesting that the user change his views about women and rewrite his answers?

Though your answers are citing scriptures and your interpretation may also be ok but it sounds that most of your answers are just demeaning particular gender. Read the code of conduct. We should respect all. – Pandya♦ 2 hours ago

@Pandya The problem is not with his answers, he's simply agreeing with and reiterating just what some scriptures say. I don't think CoC applies in this case. The question itself was, "Why do scriptures degrade women?", so philosophically one can take the extreme position that scriptures in fact degrade women due to their nature (as described in scripture). – sv. 2 hours ago

---

PS. Since the user is new and may not be aware of the presence of meta, I'm arguing on his behalf.

Answer 1

Yes, scriptures should not be used to demean particular caste or gender. Instead, scriptures should be interpreted properly. By observing the answer posts, it sounds that these answer posts are targeted towards the denigrating the character of particular gender. The motive or agenda behind the post can be recognized from the nature of post. Though posts are deleted, let me quote the text (from your quote itself) to explain you how is this rude and offensive:

Women are called evil and less intelligent in not just Hinduism, but just about every religion on the planet. Women have invented or made almost nothing in the world. They have made almost no great contribution to anything.

Look at the second and third sentence and you'll identify the intention. Read the half part of this post after the image, you'll identify the issue.

Citing anything from scripture is ok but the post itself should not be offensive or rude towards any gender or caste. Visit How does this SE handle questions that obviously have ulterior motives? and How to deal with the users who have an ulterior agenda?

Another thing one can notice is: Questions on which answers are posted, are looking for explanation and justification to the possible problematic sayings from scriptures and these answers, instead of interpreting and explaining things in respectful manner, had been promoting the rudeness or offensiveness (this is something like pouring fuel in the fire).

Reading the answer by OP it seems that OP has misconception that we are a feminist site and due to this misconception, OP has possibly tried to oppose it. So, this is nothing but the political agenda containing offensiveness.

That's why such posts which were flagged as rude/offensive have been deleted.

Answer 2

Considering this a Q&A site created for a religion, are users not allowed to take extreme conservative positions like the above and believe in literal interpretation of scriptures? Are other established users on the site going to dictate what positions other users should take on any particular issue?

Since almost of all us are conforming to scriptures to some extent & have been expressing the same through questions, answers, comments, etc. with particular interpretations, then if a user appears & follow scriptures verbatim in the full extent & expressed through questions, answers, comments, etc. then it shouldn't be problem simply because he has got different 'extent'.

There is no common consensus (about the extent of scriptures that must be followed today) enough to impart us with rational agency to render us capable to decide whether one has inappropriately or unhealthily conformed to scriptures or not.

But the mistake of the user could be in being blunt, unpleasing, unsophisticated, highly undiplomatic & probably offensive (?). I also don't believe in modern interpretations of equality, etc. but I would have answered in some diplomatic or pleasing tone as sanctioned by Manu,

सत्यं ब्रूयात् प्रियं ब्रूयान्न ब्रूयात् सत्यमप्रियम् । प्रियं च नानृतं ब्रूयादेष धर्मः सनातनः ॥ १३८ ॥

satyaṃ brūyāt priyaṃ brūyānna brūyāt satyamapriyam | priyaṃ ca nānṛtaṃ brūyādeṣa dharmaḥ sanātanaḥ || 138 ||

He shall say what is true; and he shall say what is agreeable; he shall not say what is true, but disagreeable; nor shall he say what is agreeable, but untrue; this is the eternal law.—(138)

And Kṛiṣṇa,

अनुद्वेगकरं वाक्यं सत्यं प्रियहितं च यत् | स्वाध्यायाभ्यसनं चैव वाङ्मयं तप उच्यते || 15||

anudvega-karaṁ vākyaṁ satyaṁ priya-hitaṁ cha yat svādhyāyābhyasanaṁ chaiva vāṅ-mayaṁ tapa uchyate

BG 17.15: Speech that does not cause distress, are truthful, inoffensive, and beneficial, as well as the regular recitation of the Vedic scriptures—these are declared as the austerity of speech.

Answer 3

JAI SITA RAM. I will be happy to provide more scriptural references that support just about everything I am saying if that's what you are worried about. As for "that's how a woman should be" in India this is how we consider the ideal woman. Even a court judge had said that women are supposed to be like mata Sita! How can I not say that women should be like the supreme couple - Goddess Laxmi and Lord Vishnu?

But we all know this is not about references or real religion. It is an information war launched against us by liberal feminist terrorist who want to becomes like ATHEIST WESTERN COUNTRIES at the cost of destroying Hinduism because feminism is their real religion to which they adhere 100%.

Before 20th century women were not allowed to leave the house much in western countries. Nor could they own property. Husbands could hit their wives and so much more. Almost all the great Christian saints have condemned women saying the same thing as Sanaatan scriptures. Just one example:

• St. Albert the Great (Quaestiones super de animalibus XV q. 11): "Woman is a misbegotten man and has a faulty and defective nature in comparison with his. Therefore she is unsure in herself. What she herself cannot get, she seeks to obtain through lying and diabolical deceptions. And so, to put it briefly, one must be on one's guard with every woman, as if she were a poisonous snake and the horned devil.... In evil and perverse doings woman is cleverer, that is, slyer, than man. Her feelings drive woman toward every evil, just as reason impels man toward all good."

In fact the Bible (1 Timothy 2:12) itself says:

• But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

Please write "we are a feminist site" in the CoC and specify that religion is only allowed as long as it is within the boundaries feminism if you have any honesty and don't want to restore my answer. Else restore it and I will provide more references.

Thanks. JAI BHOLENATH.